”Be ‘ambitious’ on climate, scientists urge parties”

”All parties should commit to an “ambitious” programme of climate policies, say a group of the UK’s leading climate scientists.
In an open letter, published on Monday, the academics said if the parties do not make this pledge they are not deserving of support.”

And who are these scientists?
They are the UKs Climate Community. The ‘community’ that:-

Gets paid to talk about man-made climate change. No questions asked or they wouldnt be in the community..

Treat 100 years or so of data that seems to supersede 4 billion years of actual climate change.

Dont seem to recognise that climate will always change and it is our arrogance in building cities on flood plains assuming nothing will change, despite the geological evidence. (King Cnut anyone? The cunt)

Make no fuss about subsidising the burning of American wood chips as a ludicrous ‘green’ policy.

Are happy to change UK steel making to scrap melting as it is ‘greener’ while the actual steel is made by super-polluters elsewhere.

Think the UK’s less than 2% contribution matters one fuck.

Assume we can subsidise the 3rd world to go along with this horseshit.

Anyfucker who votes for a party based on this bollocks should fuck off to China and see how many fucks they give.

bbcnews

Nominated by Cuntstable Cuntbubble.

DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT AN ANTI-SCIENCE CUNTING

The modern cult of ‘The Science’ and seeing science as dogmatic.

‘Scientism’ is an idea that science is the be all and end all of human enquiry, that everything worth knowing can be extrapolated from science, that is has prescriptive as well as descriptive qualities.

Nowadays it’s more of an attitude, exemplified by some quotes;

‘Follow The Science’
‘The Science is settled’
‘We Own The Science’

Two of these are from Politicians, the first is from a journalist from The Washington Post.
The last one is particularly bizarre and spectacularly arrogant, and was uttered by Jacinda Ardern.

It sums up an attitude of certain non-scientists in the media, politicians and activists and hip randoms on the internet who like to treat ‘The Science’ as either a doctrine or dogma. It’s an orthodoxy. They think of it as unalterable and unchanging; i.e. what was written in The Naked Ape in 1968 still holds for evolutionary biology and anthropology today. They do not understand how science is dominated by a paradigm in certain eras, eventually to give way to a new paradigm when more accurate observations and weight of evidence demands it.

We’ve seen much scientism, mandates to follow The Science and abandonment of openness and curiosity recently, discounting of theories and evidence because it’s politically inconvenient, be it in origins of Covid, climate policies and gender differences.

I have a few friends who aren’t scientists but are interested enough to want to learn about it, even at a technical and relatively complex level. Those who are interested approach with humility and also curiosity regarding the logical underpinnings of what makes science actually work as an investigative tool.

There are others I’ve known, who are poseurs, bleating out ‘Yay, science!’ but they are followers of the cult of scientism and dogma, usually via the media. They’ll pay lip service to contributions to civilisation but fail to examine anything that might challenge the current thinking. They all fell into the new atheist personality cult and assume owniing 4 books by Richard Dawkins is a substitute for genuine curiosity.

They’re the ‘Walts’ of science fandom. They inhabit Facebook pages and Reddit threads, and the YouTube comments. I knew a bloke in his forties who genuinely thought watching Cosmos and reading a few non-technical pop-science books was equivalent to a BSc in Astrophysics, whereas I also know two people who’ve earned that through actual rigour over 3-4 years at Russell Group universities.

These people are such cunts, I sometimes pretend to believe in creationism just to wind them up.

The Scientist.

Nominated by : Cuntamus Prime

Apologies for not having a nomination at 10.00 am. The next one today will be at 15.00. C.A.

Hopefully it is fixed now, tech is a cunt. C.A.

The hated BBC are now openly marketing Doctor Who as a gay programme. They have made a 60 year old science fiction show and a national institution into a blatant gay propaganda vehicle.

That depraved cunt, Russell .T. Deviant is blabbering on about why Doctor Who has so many LGBT fans. Well, maybe it’s because they have a screaming black poof (the now ubiquitous Ncunti Gayblack) in the title role, tonguing a new male villain known as the Maestro. The fact that kids are even allowed to watch this muck should have the BBC in very hot water (but it won’t). Also, he is fooling nobody with his ‘LGBT’ card carrying crap. The L and the B don’t figure and they never have. Davies and the BBC only care about peddling gays and trannies.

Why can’t a sci-fi series be just that? Why does it have to be gay? Davies tries to justify it by bleating it about how Doctor Who is ‘historically’ gay and that a ‘gay Asian man’ was it s first director. So fucking what? Brian Epstein was a raging poof, but it didn’t mean the Beatles were (or had to be) gay). People’s private lives had nothing to do with their work, and that is how it should be. But now these dirty cunts want to put what they do in everyone’s faces and into everything. Since when was sodomy anything to be proud of? And since when did it become part of mainstream entertainment?

People are sick of these bastards at the BBC telling them they are racist, sexist, and homo/transphobic. When they are just normal people who want to be entertained like they used to be. No, Doctor Who hasn’t ‘always’ been LGBT. It was just a science fiction show that was much loved in its prime. That cunt Davies – with full BBC backing – is rewriting history to spread his and their depraved tendencies.

bbcnews

Nominated by Norman.

This follows on from the most recent England friendly, against Iceland, which England lost one-nil.

Now I know not every cunter is in to football, but I’m pretty sure most here will be aware of who Bukayo Saka is. Like him or loathe him, he’s one of England’s genuine superstar players – a truly top-tier attacker who could probably walk into any team in the world. And as such, he’s become probably the poster boy of English football.

With this comes great expectation, scrutiny and criticism – some of it warranted, some not – but it’s no suprise to see his image plastered all over any article involving either England, or his domestic team Arsenal. And this is exactly what happened in the wake of England’s defeat – news stories used an image of Saka in their articles.

Now, to be clear this isn’t a cunting for Saka. No, it’s a cunting for those various race-grifters – chief amongst them the BBC and perma-victim Ian Wright – who believe that using an image of Saka in this way is racist. We lost, you see – can’t use images of black players when England lose. But if England do win a match, you’d better not use an image of a white player because that’d be you ignoring the achievements of the black players, and therefore racist. Equality at it’s finest, eh?

bbcnews

Nominated by Le Cunt Noir.

Baby Reindeer is a drama; it starts saying ‘This is a true story’, which it probably shouldn’t have. Anyway, it looked like a drama to me and when I watched it; because I’m not retarded so I knew it wasn’t a documentary.

There’s a major character in the show called Martha; she is a bat-shit crazy mental, who stalks the fuck out of the protagonist. The show streamed on Netflix; is probably still on there. Anyway, the show depicted the character Martha as a serial stalker, her previous behaviour having reached the papers and in the show she gets sent to prison for stalking the protagonist.

The show was a massive hit. Shit heads up and down the country started trying to figure out who the character Martha is in real life. Rumours have it that some sleuths found the real Martha and started hurling abuse at her, probably on X or something. Apparently the show contained footage of Martha’s Tweets, not that I saw, and this helped the sleuths, I mean shit heads, identify the real person behind the character. Still with me? I hope so!

After the show’s immediate success, this woman turns up on MSM. Her name is Fiona Harvey and she outed herself on MSM as the real person behind the character Martha, but claims she was never convicted and never stalked anyone. She went on the interview circuit and is famous for being interviewed by Piers Morgan.

Harvey is now suing Netflix for $50m, for defamation. She’s engaged some law firm in New York New York.

My summary of Ms Harvey’s position is ‘that mental, fuck-bitch-stalker in the show is me but I never did any of that, give me money.’

And if that is her position, then I hope she loses her case and has to pay Netflix’s court costs, though I fear Netflix will bung her a big wedge out of court to shut her up. That of course is my opinion and I haven’t a clue about defamation.

hollywood

Then there’s this link from Daily Fail from someone claiming ‘Martha’ or whoever we’re allowed to name is actually a bat-shit crazy mental. Hopefully we’ll be allowed to talk about this situation. I warn you fellow cunters not to say anything nasty about Ms Harvey; she has a law degree, allegedly, and probably isn’t afraid to come after you. You might get off with just 40,000 emails in a 6 month period and some 100 texts a day for good measure, but it could get nasty!

Daily Fail

Nominated by Cuntologist.